https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82702
--- Comment #2 from Marco Castelluccio ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Invoking-Gcov.html#Invoking-Gcov
>
> The output is a single .gcov file per .gcda file.
>
> The same documentation was i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57359
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, ch3root at openwall dot com wrote:
> I've also converted the testcase to allocated memory:
>
> --
> #incl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
But in fact we probably just need:
Index: fold-const.c
===
--- fold-const.c(revision 254037)
+++ fold-const.c(working copy)
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82705
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82704
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82710
Bug ID: 82710
Summary: Incorrect warning:unnecessary parentheses in
declaration of global friend functions
[-Werror=parentheses]
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82710
--- Comment #1 from Sylvestre Ledru ---
With gcc-8 (Debian 8-20171023-1) 8.0.0 20171023 (experimental) [trunk revision
253997]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82711
Bug ID: 82711
Summary: -Wignored-qualifiers could be moved into -Wextra
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81706
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 25 08:05:58 2017
New Revision: 254069
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254069&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/81706
* attribs.c (attribute_value_equal): Us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82712
Bug ID: 82712
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in sp_valid_at, at
config/i386/i386.c:11383
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82703
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82713
Bug ID: 82713
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in ix86_builtin_vectorization_cost,
at config/i386/i386.c:44475
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82460
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82370
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82613
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82713
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
My bet is boolean vectors with QI/HImode. But eventually the vectorizer uses
vector_load on sth not being a vector load as well. Yeah...
/* Without looking at the actual initializer a vector of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82713
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82712
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82710
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78896
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lucdanton at free dot fr
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78591
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82713
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
non-SLP manages to get by using scalar_to_vec given it only handles the case of
all constants/externals being the same value. As said the costing
infrastructure
inside the vectorizer itself is somewhat limi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82714
Bug ID: 82714
Summary: internal compiler error: in vect_transform_stmt
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82714
--- Comment #1 from Carsten Fuchs ---
Created attachment 42468
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42468&action=edit
related .s file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
>
> --- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
> But in fact we probably just need:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82707
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Mentioned here ( https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2017-10/msg01907.html )
for r253982, Intel64 -fpic -mcmodel=medium -mcmodel=large.
Mentioned here ( https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2017-10/msg01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82714
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mliska at suse dot cz
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82714
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82714
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82715
Bug ID: 82715
Summary: support setting default for -pipe as configure option
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82702
--- Comment #3 from Marco Castelluccio ---
See also this comment:
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/3c311329bd71ab4589fced78baf30187e50b6d3f/gcc/gcov.c#L865.
This used to be true, but it's not anymore.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82714
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Reduced test-case:
$ cat pr82714.c
enum
{
a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, j, k
};
int l;
void m (int *s)
{
short n, o, p;
float(*q)[k];
int r, i;
while (l > 0)
r = l;
for (;;)
{
i = 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82702
--- Comment #4 from Marco Castelluccio ---
I suppose this is a regression caused by
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/41da7513d5aaaff3a5651b40edeccc1e32ea785a.
Is it intentional?
Note that generating multiple files makes parsing slower,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82700
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82714
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Fixed on 7-branch by r253931.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82702
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82714
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82436
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carsten.fuchs at cafu dot de
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71820
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Oct 25 09:55:21 2017
New Revision: 254072
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254072&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-25 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/71820
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71820
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82436
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Oct 25 09:59:39 2017
New Revision: 254073
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254073&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-25 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/82436
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
> There are two things to it, stripping sign-nops from the comparison
> operand (careful!) and stripping arbitrary nops from the result
> to look for an argument equal to the comparison operand.
My change do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26750
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222
Bug 24222 depends on bug 26750, which changed state.
Bug 26750 Summary: invalid inline asm sematics are caught too late
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26750
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57069
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82707
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
[...]
> I can't reproduce though at r253997. Can somebody post a configure line and
> command line?
I'm seeing it on i386-pc-solaris2.11 (no speci
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
>
> --- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > There are two things to it, stripping
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Dennis Clarke from comment #6)
> Actually first thing I did was remove a few options from configure stage
> such that I could at least get past this small bump in the road :
>
> --enable-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
But why only do this for FLOAT_MODE_P? Either the logic here isn't
correct, or cc_modes_compatible isn't the correct hook (we'll need
a new hook then?), or determining ordered/unordered by CC mode does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82711
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I'd argue it doesn't help readability at all if it makes the code appear to do
one thing but it actually does something different.
The warning has always been in -Wall for ignored qualifiers on return type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82647
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
FWIW libc++ only accepts this code because includes the whole of
which includes which includes . So libc++ also
accepts:
#include
int
main()
{
std::tuple t;
std::shared_ptr s;
}
And clearly t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81862
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14741
--- Comment #39 from Thomas Koenig ---
Clang has this implemented via polyhedral optimization,
see https://polly.llvm.org/ (news from September 2017).
Can gcc do something similar?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82710
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82471
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #33 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #28)
> Generally, I don't understand why we are linking sources in the build
> directory instead of passing -I flags pointing directly to the source
> directory.
I th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58687
--- Comment #29 from Max TenEyck Woodbury ---
While #line is indeed most commonly used by code generators, it can be used in
other contexts. The most common other use is to remove sensitive and useless
file name components from the file specific
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #34 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #15)
> Maybe I'm just thick, but from the generated
> x86_64-apple-darwin17.0.0/libstdc++-v3/include/Makefile, it is entirely
> unclear to me how the stamp mechanism
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82702
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Marco is right that it started with the mentioned revision. But let me start in
more general context:
Consider virtual.cpp file that includes some standard header files.
In that case gcov tool can be invoked
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #12)
> But why only do this for FLOAT_MODE_P? Either the logic here isn't
> correct, or cc_modes_compatible isn't the correct hook (we'll need
> a new hook then?),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #35 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #34)
> So all the files in ${allstamped} will have been created, which means all
> the symlinks will be present (assuming no errors from the $(LN_S) command,
> whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #36 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Also, this strongly suggests the problem for RTEMS is different:
(In reply to Chris Johns from comment #24)
> I would welcome a patch attached to this ticket.
>
> My efforts with .NOTPARALLEL cannot get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
--- Comment #14 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #13)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #12)
> > But why only do this for FLOAT_MODE_P? Either the logic here isn't
> > correct, or cc_modes_compatible isn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81938
Rimvydas (RJ) changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81938
--- Comment #3 from Rimvydas (RJ) ---
fmt_cache_1.f in valgrind is reproducible on aarch64-suse-linux
One scientific package has a tendency to crash in similar place.
Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
#0 0x40003b9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78511
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82707
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82710
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Incorrect |[8 Regression] Incorrect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79283
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Oct 25 12:42:58 2017
New Revision: 254076
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254076&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79283 fix filesystem::read_symlink for /proc
PR lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Simplified but not equal - you are also stripping a possible truncation.
> I think the original code only ever stripped widening conversions.
Right, but IMO there is no real reason to distinguish the 2 ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82716
Bug ID: 82716
Summary: struct/class vs. tuple_element/tuple_size
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82716
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062
>
> --- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > Simplified but not equal - you are a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77267
--- Comment #12 from Matthias Klose ---
fyi, this is now fixed in Ubuntu 16.04 LTS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #37 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #35)
> Can somebody confirm the links are not only present, but point to the
> relevant file in the source tree?
It seems OK:
In file included from
/User
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82716
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Oct 25 13:55:56 2017
New Revision: 254077
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254077&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82716 avoid stupid -Wmismatched-tags warnings
PR li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82716
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wak
word 1073741824
.align 2
.LC1:
.word 1065353216
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 8.0.0 20171025 (experimental)"
I would also note that the documentation could be improved by better detailing
the accepted ABI strings and giving valid examples (ILP32 isn't accepted as it
is uppercase).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41091
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82718
Bug ID: 82718
Summary: Bad DWARF5 .debug_loclists generation
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82718
--- Comment #1 from Mark Wielaard ---
Created attachment 42471
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42471&action=edit
preprocessed e.i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82718
--- Comment #2 from Mark Wielaard ---
Created attachment 42472
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42472&action=edit
generated assembler e.s
assembler produced with gcc (GCC) 8.0.0 20171024 (experimental)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
--- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool ---
My point is that doing this only for FLOAT_MODE_P makes no real sense.
If we can describe ordered comparisons with special CC modes, we should
do tests with those modes only here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82622
--- Comment #6 from G. Steinmetz ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #5)
> Is this valid code and should compile
It should be legal, IMO. Note that "a" in z1.f90 is effectively unused
(the type parameters need not be used anywhere in the DT).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82719
Bug ID: 82719
Summary: [PDT] ICE in transfer_expr, at fortran/trans-io.c:2393
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82719
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||82173
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82720
Bug ID: 82720
Summary: [PDT] ICE in gfc_conv_component_ref, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:2400
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686
--- Comment #8 from Dennis Clarke ---
That helps actually. However I am concerned that the folks from IBM are
entirely focused on a particular power architecture and old powerpc cpus
are not considered. Freescale implementations even less so. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82721
Bug ID: 82721
Summary: Error message with corrupted text, sometimes ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82721
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz ---
With a test version (configured with --enable-checking=yes)
sometimes a backtrace is produced, like :
f951: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
0xca7e1f crash_signal
../../gcc/toplev.c:326
0x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82639
Victor Porton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82722
Bug ID: 82722
Summary: internal compiler error: in finish_member_declaration,
at cp/semantics.c:2984
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82708
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, keno at juliacomputing dot com wrote:
> First, the build process looking for the headers in /sys-include rather
> than /include where glibc installs them. Leads to the s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82721
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58687
--- Comment #30 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
An option to use just the file's basename in __FILE__ is bug 82176. I
think that's a much more reasonable feature than straining the
interpretation of what counts as the line number for t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82721
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82718
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82226
--- Comment #2 from John McFarlane ---
79092?
1 - 100 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
